Some cynical curmudgeonly thoughts on a scheme to make us all safer by fitting air travelers with remote-control shock collars, err, "Electro-Muscular Disruption Technology".
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Being pretty conservative, there are several thousand flights a day. Sure, some are cases where the plane continues on after a layover or something like that... But, bluntly, that's a hell of a lot people you'd need. With a lot of specialized training. Not exactly cheap. (Don't forget, they're going need days off, vacations, rest cycles, etc.)This thought is absurd. How many malfunctions are potential ? Then it will be lawsuit city! If the security on the ground is decent then there should be no problems. They should also have a mandatory Air Marshal ( undercover) on each flight. Get rid of half the useless TSA and put marshalls on planes.
Being pretty conservative, there are several thousand flights a day. Sure, some are cases where the plane continues on after a layover or something like that... But, bluntly, that's a hell of a lot people you'd need. With a lot of specialized training. Not exactly cheap. (Don't forget, they're going need days off, vacations, rest cycles, etc.)
A simpler approach would be to allow law enforcement officers who choose to do so to carry their firearms on planes, without the current hurdles and hoops.
I'll rent a car and drive cross country (and take 3-4 days doing it) rather than go through all that crap. It's good for Enterprise, bad for Southwest.
Close, but no cigar. It's micro-chips, not tattoos.Yeah. They'll replace this ridiculous proposal with simple, cheap, bar code tattoos, where everyone's bar code is read by a supercomputer housed in NORAD.
They call it "The Beast."
Now that’s an interesting idea
And what's next it will explode should you venture outside of the designated area. And don’t forget the booby traps in the on board bathroom should you stay to long…. I’m thinking a trap door
So it is a stun gun and it is remote which means a radio frequency.. Gee that couldn’t be used, abused or accidentally set off now could it?
Guns on planes just seem like a bad idea. decompression issues and lots of civilians in a crowded space, I think a better choice of weapons would be in order.
On 8 May 2003 during hearings on the Federal Flight Deck Officer Program, Dan Graves of Oviedo, Florida, a DC-8 First Officer for Airborne Express, and Executive Director for the Coalition of Airline Pilots Associations, testified before the House Subcommittee on Aviation:
[O]ur opponents claim that a bullet piercing the pressure vessel of the aircraft will cause a catastrophic loss of the hull. There's simply no evidence to support these claims. In fact, the Israelis have had a number of incidents where terrorists have discharged small arms in the cabins of their aircraft without causing catastrophic damage to the airframe. A study by Boeing aircraft agrees. It found that one or numerous small caliber rounds piercing the vessel would not cause a catastrophic loss.
Mythbusters busted that too I think.A bullet decompressing a plane explosively is a myth.
No no no, next it'll be two micro capsules in each carotid artery which will completely dissolve in 22 hours if you don't get the President out of New York.
Best get lookin' for my eye patch.